Brookings Institution scholar Michael O'Hanlon, who I'm given to understand would have received a high-level appointment in a Kerry administration, and co-author of a recent book on "what the Democrats need to do" about national security policy, feels the urge to surge. As we've seen previously, O'Hanlon's Brookings colleague Ken Pollack feels much the same way.
My advice to Democrats in congress and hoping to run for president would be to stop listening to these guys.
UPDATE: Elsewhere in the liberal hawk multiverse, Jeffrey Herf explains that the Bush administration's long record of incompetence is a good reason to support the surge.
Assuming, of course, the Democrats and the Republicans have different objectives.
Elsewhere, administration spokesmen ask how can people be so sure the urge to surge won't succeed in Iraq?
Because, perhaps, all your best generals and officers think it won't work, maybe? Because the people you're putting in charge of things are the ones who've bolluxed it up tremendously "training" police and death squada already? Perhaps because a Navy man who knows carriers and aircraft isn't the one who should oversee combat resembling Stalingrad more than anything else? Because, maybe, the Iraqi "government" doesn't want it? Because, maybe, all the people who were wrong about the war in the first place think it's a good idea, and all the people who were right have hundreds of good reasons not to do this?
You know, there are other plans out there. The progressive Democrats have one. The Iraq Study Group has another; in fact, some of your old friends even liked it better.
But I forget.
You and your bases' definition of $uccess is a little different from the vulgar masses.
No comments:
Post a Comment